rabble.ca - Great Bear Rainforesthttp://rabble.ca/category/tags-issues/great-bear-rainforest
enIt's time to protect the Great Bear Rainforest's grizzlieshttp://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/david-suzuki/2016/02/its-time-to-protect-great-bear-rainforests-grizzlies
<div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">David Suzuki</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-image-for-node field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://rabble.ca/sites/default/files/styles/large_story_850px/public/node-images/800px-grizzly_bear_on_a_rock_overlooking.jpg?itok=iNY3F1Im" width="1180" height="600" alt="Image/Wikimedia Commons" title="Image/Wikimedia Commons" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><p><em>Like this article? rabble is reader-supported journalism. <a href="https://secure.rabble.ca/donate/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Chip in</a> to keep stories like these coming.</em></p>
<p><a href="https://secure.rabble.ca/donate/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><img src="/sites/rabble/files/node-images/donategreen.png" width="120" height="30" /></a></p>
<p>The agreement between government, industry, First Nations and environmental groups to <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/great-bear-rainforest-bc-agreement-1.3426034" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">protect much of the Great Bear Rainforest</a> should be celebrated. The deal makes almost 85 per cent of the forested land base in this massive region on B.C.'s coast off limits to logging. Forestry in the remaining 15 per cent will follow "lighter-touch" practices, called "ecosystem-based management." Most importantly, First Nations will have greater decision-making authority over industrial development on their lands.</p>
<p>However, while the agreement <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWtvgIUaerY&amp;feature=youtu.be" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">helps protect grizzly bear and other wildlife habitat</a>, it doesn't protect the bears themselves, contrary to B.C. Premier Christy Clark's claims at a news conference. Hunting grizzly and black bears in the Great Bear <a href="http://www.nationalobserver.com/2016/02/01/news/grizzly-bear-trophy-hunt-still-legal-part-great-bear-rainforest" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">remains legal</a>.</p>
<p>The agreement actually contains <a href="https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2016PREM0011-000122?WT.cg_n=Hootsuite" rel="nofollow">no reference to grizzly hunting</a>. To slow the hunt, First Nations and others must pony up millions of dollars to <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/end-of-great-bear-rainforest-grizzly-hunt-to-cost-first-nations-millions/article28563944/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">buy out existing guide outfitting territories</a> open to foreign big-game hunters. Trophy hunting by B.C. residents -- governed under a different process -- will proceed regardless of whether First Nations and their allies purchase and retire foreign hunting quotas.</p>
<p>Had the government been serious about ending the barbaric hunt, it could have banned it outright under the province's Wildlife Act, or simply ended the open season on grizzlies in the Great Bear, as was done by earlier governments to protect the area's Kermode "spirit bears." (Only bears with white fur are protected, even though bears with black coats can carry the spirit bear gene.) Despite the spin, the B.C. government has never recognized the <a href="http://www.bearsforever.ca" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Coastal First Nations ban on trophy hunting</a> in the Great Bear Rainforest.</p>
<p>Seeing grizzlies feeding on salmon as the fish make their way up the coastal streams and rivers of B.C. and Alaska is magnificent. These large brown bears with their characteristic hump and silver-tipped fur scoop salmon from the river in an <a href="https://vimeo.com/19582018" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">age-old interplay</a> between ocean, river, fish, bear, bird and forest. The salmon bring nutrients from the ocean. The bears eat salmon and drag the carcasses into the forest, providing food for other animals, like eagles, and fertilizer for the massive rainforest trees.</p>
<p>First Nations-owned and operated <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmeEuuy1AJ0&amp;index=2&amp;list=PLEC2C8757FAC7CCB7" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">bear-viewing operations</a> are booming in the Great Bear Rainforest, creating jobs and revenue. The trophy hunt threatens these sustainable businesses.</p>
<p>The grizzly bear trophy hunt is a sport like dogfighting, cockfighting and bullfighting are sports -- maybe worse. Bears that people come to see and photograph can be legally shot by trophy hunters, armed with high-powered rifles and scopes. That the B.C. government allows it to continue in the face of opposition from First Nations and a huge majority of British Columbians for the sake of profit is disgusting.</p>
<p>I'm not against hunting -- and many who oppose the trophy hunt agree that sustainable hunting can be a good way to put food on the table. But shooting an animal -- often on its way to feed and thus an easy target -- just to hang its head on the wall or put its skin on the floor is not hunting. It's killing for pleasure.</p>
<p>Government justifies allowing this practice by arguing the hunt is well-managed and that grizzlies are plentiful, with only a small number killed each year by hunters. Even if that were true -- which it's not -- it's a poor excuse for an inhumane practice.</p>
<p>Studies confirm earlier <a href="http://www.davidsuzuki.org/publications/reports/2010/ensuring-a-future-for-canadas-grizzly-bears/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">research by the David Suzuki Foundation</a> showing the hunt is not sustainable. A peer-reviewed report by Simon Fraser University, University of Victoria and Raincoast Conservation Foundation scientists in the journal <em>PLOS ONE</em> <a href="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0078041" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">analyzed the provincial government's own data</a> and concluded too many grizzlies are being killed in B.C. They found overkilling of grizzly bears by humans is common and that annual hunting mortality limits set by government are too risky.</p>
<p>Grizzlies reproduce slowly, generally having one or two cubs every three or more years. They also face threats from habitat loss, damage and fragmentation; cascading effects of salmon collapse and climate change; and death from poaching, vehicle and train collisions and the inevitable adverse impacts of careless human behaviour. Grizzlies have already been eliminated or are currently threatened in 18 per cent of the province, including the Lower Mainland and most of the Interior.</p>
<p>It’s time to <a href="http://www.bearsforever.ca" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">stop killing bears</a> for trophies.</p>
<p><em>Written with contributions from David Suzuki Foundation Ontario and Northern Canada Director Faisal Moola.</em></p>
<p><em>Learn more at <a href="http://www.davidsuzuki.org/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">www.davidsuzuki.org</a>.</em></p>
<p><em><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Grizzly_bear_on_a_rock_overlooking.jpg" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Image/Wikimedia Commons</a><br /></em></p>
</p></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-embedded-video field-type-video-embed-field field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">
<div class="embedded-video">
<div class="player">
<iframe class="" width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/nWtvgIUaerY?width%3D640%26amp%3Bheight%3D360%26amp%3Bautoplay%3D0%26amp%3Bvq%3Dlarge%26amp%3Brel%3D0%26amp%3Bcontrols%3D1%26amp%3Bautohide%3D2%26amp%3Bshowinfo%3D1%26amp%3Bmodestbranding%3D0%26amp%3Btheme%3Ddark%26amp%3Biv_load_policy%3D1%26amp%3Bwmode%3Dopaque" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> </div>
</div>
</div></div></div>Tue, 09 Feb 2016 23:23:06 +0000David Suzuki122934 at http://rabble.caCecil the lion's killing shines spotlight on barbaric trophy huntinghttp://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/david-suzuki/2015/08/cecil-lions-killing-shines-spotlight-on-barbaric-trophy-hunting
<div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">David Suzuki</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-image-for-node field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://rabble.ca/sites/default/files/styles/large_story_850px/public/node-images/1600px-cecil_the_lion_at_hwange_national_park_4516560206.jpg?itok=w1Brsc6g" width="1180" height="600" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><p><em> <a href="https://secure.rabble.ca/donate/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Chip in</a> to keep stories like these coming.</em></p>
<p><a href="https://secure.rabble.ca/donate/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><img src="/sites/rabble/files/node-images/donategreen.png" width="120" height="30" /></a></p>
<p>A beloved animal, tagged for tracking by researchers, crosses the invisible boundary between protected and unprotected area and is killed by a hunter who has paid tens of thousands of dollars for the "experience". That was the fate of Zimbabwe's Cecil the lion, whose killing sparked torrents of online and on-air outrage. But it also happens around the world every day, including in my home province of B.C.</p>
<p>Many people are familiar with <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/28/killer-of-cecil-the-lion-was-american-zimbabwe-officials-claim" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Cecil's story</a>. Minnesota dentist Walter Palmer and his guides, hunting at night with spotlights, are alleged to have tied a dead animal to their car near Hwange National Park to lure the lion. According to reports, Palmer wounded Cecil with an arrow, then tracked and shot the animal with a rifle 40 hours later. The lion's body was found on the park's outskirts, skinned and headless, along with the tracking collar.</p>
<p>Killing animals solely for "sport" or "trophies" is an ongoing and worldwide practice, and something Palmer had engaged in many times and in many places, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/07/29/walter-palmer-hunter-ceci_n_7898822.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">including Canada</a>. He was even convicted of charges related to an <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/2015/07/29/cecil-the-lion-killer-walter-james-palmer-has-bear-related-felony-record.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">illegal bear kill</a> in 2008.</p>
<p>Closer to home, a grizzly that was tagged for research in Banff National Park had the misfortune to cross from Alberta, where grizzly hunting is illegal, into B.C., <a href="http://www.raincoast.org/projects/grizzly-bears/troph-hunting/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">where it isn't</a>, and was legally <a href="http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/alberta/Former+Banff+research+bear+legally+shot+killed+hunter/10014284/story.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">shot and killed</a>. On the B.C. coast, people were outraged when a photo surfaced of NHL player <a href="http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/canadian-born-nhl-player-takes-heat-for-killing-grizzly-bear-1.1441024" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Clayton Stoner with a grizzly he shot</a> in the Great Bear Rainforest. Coastal First Nations have <a href="http://www.bearsforever.ca/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">banned trophy hunting</a> there, but the government doesn't recognize the ban. The bear, named Cheeky by local residents, was skinned and had his head and paws cut off, with the rest of the carcass left to rot. Reports have also surfaced that the winner of the Guide Outfitters Association of B.C.'s highest award in 2015 was <a href="http://news.nationalpost.com/news/world/man-named-b-c-s-top-hunting-guide-for-2015-found-guilty-of-hunting-grizzly-bear-with-bait" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">convicted of illegal grizzly baiting</a> in 2012.</p>
<p>Even though many grizzly populations are vulnerable and close to 90 per cent of British Columbians, including many food hunters, <a href="http://www.bearsforever.ca/this_debate_is_over" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">oppose trophy hunting</a>, B.C.'s government <a href="http://www.vancouverobserver.com/news/grizzly-bear-population-risk-bc-liberal-government-aligns-trophy-hunters?page=0%2C0" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">refuses to end the hunt</a>, even in parks and areas where First Nations have banned the practice. Conservationists and other experts have <a href="http://www.macleans.ca/society/grizzly-toll-b-cs-controversial-trophy-bear-hunt/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">challenged government population estimates</a>, claiming they're based on guesswork and that the real number is likely less than half the 15,000 on which the government justifies the hunt.</p>
<p>Large carnivores like lions, grizzlies and leopards that are targeted by big-game hunters are extremely <a href="http://www.davidsuzuki.org/blogs/panther-lounge/2013/11/biology-not-politics-must-drive-bc-grizzly-bear-management/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">vulnerable</a> despite their size and ferocity. They range over large areas, which often puts them in conflict with humans and our infrastructure. Parks and protected areas are too small to provide adequate habitat, so bears often wander into areas where they can be killed by hunters or vehicles. They also reproduce later in life, infrequently, and their young often have low survival rates, so populations don't recover quickly when overhunted. </p>
<p>Large carnivores are also keystone species that play a crucial role in the food web by helping to regulate prey populations. B.C. grizzlies also <a href="http://www.davidsuzuki.org/blogs/healthy-oceans-blog/2012/10/-pacific-underwater-salmon-dont-grow-on-trees-but-trees-grow-on-salmon/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">contribute to rainforest growth</a> by dragging salmon carcasses into the woods, where the fish remains and bear scat provide fertilizer. In B.C., trophy hunters have slaughtered more than 12,000 grizzlies over the past three decades. Like Palmer, non-resident hunters here pay large amounts of money to "bag" a grizzly because the species is protected in their home country, such as the U.S., or because populations have dwindled to a handful, as in Western Europe, where the species is now protected. </p>
<p>Killing animals purely for the "thrill" is barbaric and wasteful, and <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/2015/07/29/cecil-the-lion-does-killing-lions-help-save-them.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">can't be justified on economic or conservation grounds</a>. Studies show more money can be made from people who want to <a href="http://pacificwild.org/news-and-resources/research-and-reports/economic-impact-of-bear-viewing-and-bear-hunting-in-the" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">view and photograph them</a>. Research also shows very little money paid by trophy hunters benefits the local economy.</p>
<p>We're at a critical moment in human history: our population, technology, consumptive demand and global economy are overwhelming the planet's life-support systems — air, water, soil and other species. We're in a global eco-crisis that demands a redefinition of our relationship with plants and other animals.</p>
<p>It's time to end trophy hunting. In B.C., the government must listen to citizens and conservationists, <a href="http://www.bearsforever.ca/this_debate_is_over" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">respect First Nations</a> laws and customs and <a href="https://www.change.org/p/protect-grizzly-bears-by-banning-the-trophy-hunt-in-bc" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">end the grizzly hunt</a>.</p>
<p><em>Written with contributions from David Suzuki Foundation Senior Editor Ian Hanington.</em></p>
<p><em>Learn more at <a href="http://www.davidsuzuki.org" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">www.davidsuzuki.org</a>.</em></p>
<p><em>Photo: <a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cecil_the_lion_at_Hwange_National_Park_%284516560206%29.jpg" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Wikimedia Commons</a><br /></em></p>
<p><em><a href="https://secure.rabble.ca/donate/" rel="nofollow">Chip in</a> to keep stories like these coming.</em></p>
<p><a href="https://secure.rabble.ca/donate/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><img src="/sites/rabble/files/node-images/donategreen.png" width="120" height="30" /></a></p>
</p></div></div></div>Tue, 04 Aug 2015 22:37:27 +0000David Suzuki119507 at http://rabble.caThe Great Bear Rainforest: Carbon store or carbon story? http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/policynote/2013/01/great-bear-rainforest-carbon-store-or-carbon-story
<div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Ben Parfitt</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-image-for-node field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://rabble.ca/sites/default/files/styles/large_story_850px/public/node-images/gbr.jpg?itok=f1RONIFE" width="1180" height="600" alt="Photo: Dogwood Initiative/Flickr" title="Photo: Dogwood Initiative/Flickr" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><p>The provincial government, First Nations and environmental organizations alike have all hailed it as an ecological triumph and a shining beacon of a new economic order based on conservation principles.</p>
<p>Yet when it comes to talking openly about one of the hallmarks of that emerging economy -- a project that cashes in on the carbon-storing capacity of trees in the Great Bear Rainforest -- not one of the principles is anxious to talk.</p>
<p>Neither the Pacific Carbon Trust -- a Crown corporation that buys carbon offsets from third parties using our tax dollars to help the B.C. government and all public institutions including schools and hospitals become "carbon neutral" -- nor a single provincial government ministry, nor the First Nations involved in the scheme, nor the company that helped the First Nations design the plan, issued a single press release unveiling any details of the plan.</p>
<p>Instead, feeding information to select media outlets has been the preferred choice for getting the story out wherein project proponents either deliberately or unintentionally misrepresent key aspects of the project. In a <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/first-nations-aim-to-capitalize-on-carbon-in-great-bear-rainforest/article7307187/" rel="nofollow"><em>Globe and Mail</em> story earlier this week</a>, for example, readers were told that First Nations in the Great Bear Rainforest are "gearing up to promote and sell carbon credits" and that under the plan any revenues generated by the sale of such credits "would be split" between First Nations and the provincial government.</p>
<p>In point of fact, the First Nation consortium has already sold 315,815 such credits for undisclosed millions of dollars to Pacific Carbon Trust (PCT), almost all of which were sold eight months ago, and the provincial government is sharing not one iota in any of the revenues generated. And now they're gearing up to sell more.</p>
<p>The reticence to talk openly is understandable. In a month or so, B.C. Auditor General John Doyle is expected to release a report that will be highly critical of the Pacific Carbon Trust or PCT. The Auditor General's report has been fueled, in part, by hard questions raised about the validity of the offsets.</p>
<p>The <em>Vancouver Sun's</em> Gord Hoekstra, for example, has written numerous stories critical of PCT-supported projects. Hoekstra noted in one such piece that PCT guidelines stipulate that the Crown corporation is supposed to buy offsets from companies engaged in climatically beneficial projects that would not have got off the ground were it not for financial assistance. <a href="http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Carbon+Trading+Projects+outside+trust+criteria+reaping+benefits+criticized/6495348/story.html" rel="nofollow">Yet 22 out of 25 projects Hoekstra examined</a> last year involved companies that had already made significant investments in the projects before PCT gave them cash, including companies with deep pockets such as energy giant, Encana Corporation.</p>
<p>Echoing Hoekstra's critique, Bob Simpson, Independent MLA for Cariboo North, has long called for a wholesale rethink of the provincial government's carbon neutral objectives. In 2011, shortly after the PCT published its first comprehensive list of carbon offset projects it had financially supported, Simpson noted:</p>
<p>"In order to justify <a href="http://www.welcometowilliamslake.ca/index.php/politics/170-bob-simpsons-musings/4060-carbon-offsetting.html" rel="nofollow">taking money away from classrooms and hospitals</a> to give to the private sector, the PCT must prove that every project they funded would not have proceeded without our tax money subsidizing it. But, I don't believe any of the projects our tax money subsidized resulted in a decrease in carbon emissions that wasn't already happening or would have happened without the PCT's involvement."</p>
<p>In the two years prior to the PCT's purchases of carbon offsets from the Great Bear Rainforest (GBR) project, the single largest offset purchases made by the PCT to help the provincial government achieve its "carbon neutral" status were also from so-called "forest conservation" projects. Yet both purchases -- one from a leading Canadian conservation organization, the other from one of the largest private-land logging companies in the province -- raised serious questions about the alleged climatic benefits associated with the purchases.</p>
<p>In the first case, the Nature Conservancy of Canada <a href="http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2011/07/22/StrangeOffsets/" rel="nofollow">was paid an estimated $2.3 million from the PCT</a> for doing what conservation groups do -- conserving a tract of privately owned forestland in B.C.'s southern interior that had been logged for decades. The money came on top of $25 million that the NCC received from the federal government toward the purchase cost, later estimated at $125 million.</p>
<p>The NCC was able to convince the PCT to buy the offsets using a purely hypothetical scenario that involved what would have happened had another buyer succeeded in purchasing the lands. Under the imaginary scenario, the other buyer would have logged the lands at a rate five times greater than what had historically occurred. The difference between the purely hypothetical rate and the new and allegedly "innovative" land-use practice employed by the NCC was what was eventually marketed as carbon offsets.</p>
<p>In the second case, TimberWest, one of the most active logging companies on Vancouver Island, convinced PCT to pay it an undisclosed but likely <a href="http://www2.canada.com/theprovince/news/editorial/story.html?id=8b956e5b-a5e3-4215-9e75-7a146853989c&amp;p=1" rel="nofollow">even larger sum of money</a> than that paid to the Nature Conservancy. In that case, the logging company received tax dollars for allegedly "conserving" remnant patches of old-growth forest bordering Strathcona Provincial Park. The trouble was, in publicly available documents the company had told its own shareholders it did not intend to log such lands. Not for five or more years anyway, given their marginal economic value. Furthermore, the company indicated that it intended to increase its logging elsewhere, thus offsetting any of the alleged offsets that B.C. taxpayers were now on the hook for.</p>
<p>The PCT has refused to disclose what it pays third parties such as TimberWest and the NCC for their offsets on the grounds that such information is proprietary. But in the case of the GBR carbon storage project there are numerous reasons why the Crown corporation ought to be compelled to fully disclose all aspects of the project, including the amount of money that has exchanged hands.</p>
<p>First, the project would not have happened had the provincial government not enacted legislation that created a raft of new parks and that reduced logging rates in the GBR, without which any offset claims could not possibly have been made. Second, the alleged offsets were generated on Crown lands over which the government has jurisdiction, albeit lands that also are the traditional territories of the six First Nations involved. And lastly, the provincial government and the First Nations involved expressly agreed in a signed "<a href="http://www.newrelationship.gov.bc.ca/agreements_and_leg/atmospheric_agreements.html" rel="nofollow">Atmospheric Benefit Sharing Agreement</a>"<br /> two years ago that the provincial government, on behalf of British Columbians, had a partial ownership interest in the offsets.</p>
<p>In response to written questions, the Coastal First Nations Great Bear Intiative, on behalf of the six First Nations involved in the offset sale -- the Nuxalk, Wuikinuxv, Metlakatla, Kitasoo, Heiltsuk and Gitga'at -- said that the revenues received from PCT were not something that the nations wished "to share publicly as we are still in the process of working with prospective buyers from the private sector."</p>
<p>For reasons unexplained in the Atmospheric Benefits Sharing Agreement, the provincial government agrees that in the first two years of the agreement, which expires in 2025, the six First Nations will be entitled to sell 77 per cent of all available offset credits associated with the project.</p>
<p>In two signed <a href="http://mer.markit.com/br-reg/public/project.jsp?project_id=103000000000143" rel="nofollow">"transfer agreements"</a> between PCT and the six First Nations in the GBR, a total of 315,815 were sold last year, 300,000 of which changed hands on May 15.</p>
<p>"The majority" of those purchased offsets, PCT confirmed in an email Thursday, "will be used to meet the carbon neutral government commitment for 2012." If that proves to be the case, in a document that should be released by the PCT midway through this year, the GBR carbon project will be the single largest project used to meet the government's carbon neutral commitments in the most recent year.</p>
<p>The PCT's combined purchases from the six coastal First Nations to date work out to exactly 77 per cent of the estimated net reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from the GBR area once various risks are taken into account, says Carbon Credit Corp., the company that helped the First Nations develop the project. The company has since been taken over by Offsetters.</p>
<p>The document is a summary of a much larger 250-page Project Design Document. It has not been posted online, even though it served as the foundation for the project being independently verified by KPMG. KPMG's Micahel Armstrong, a registered professional forester and chartered accountant who signed the verification letter, refused to answer questions about the larger document, referring questions to Offsetters.</p>
<p>In written responses to questions about the larger document, Offsetters and the First Nations involved said:</p>
<p>"The Project Design document is not being released for two reasons: 1) It would require the consent of all the member first nations in the GBR, since they are the beneficiaries; and 2) it contains significant Intellectual Property that GBI [the Great Bear Initiative] has paid for and could be taken for free by another party."</p>
<p>As a result, members of the public must rely on a very generalized description of how all those alleged "atmospheric benefits" were calculated, benefits that oddly enough the provincial government, despite signing a "sharing" agreement, is refusing to take advantage of.</p>
<p>"The government has not sold and received any money from its share," Tim Lesiuk, executive director of business development with the provincial government's Climate Action Secretariat, confirmed earlier this week.</p>
<p>So what forms the basis of all the credits that the First Nations benefit from, but the province curiously is absenting itself from?</p>
<p>According to Offsetters and the First Nations involved, the basis for the "carbon project" is very simple. It is legislation brought in by the provincial government in 2009 that formally created new protected areas in the GBR covering nearly 1.6 million hectares of land and that will reduce logging by as much as half a million cubic metres annually.</p>
<p>On the surface, this seems straightforward enough. If more trees are protected and less logging occurs, then those trees will pull more carbon out of the atmosphere and store that carbon for decades to come.</p>
<p>But the big question is whether those new protected areas and new approaches to logging were driven from the get-go by organizations and individuals with a clear design on improving carbon stores.</p>
<p>Clearly, 15 years ago when the first official land-use processes began on British Columbia's coast, there was no carbon market and there was no talk about one occurring any time soon.</p>
<p>Twelve years ago in 2001 when then Premier Ujaal Dosanjh made a landmark announcement that set in motion the protected areas process and the beginning of the push toward "ecosystem-based management" in coastal forests, no one was talking about a coastal forest carbon project either.</p>
<p>In the intervening years, and in particular since 2004-2005 when logging rates began to fall, the push to protect more forests in the GBR has been almost solely about protecting biological diversity and instituting new, more ecologically friendly rates and forms of logging.</p>
<p>"This never was a carbon project," Simpson says, adding that even when new parks and new ecosystem-based logging areas were delineated following the provincial government's 2009 legislation "carbon money was not required" to make them so.</p>
<p>If carbon money wasn't required to make them so, then the "project" such as it is would not qualify for financial support from the PCT, Simpson says. Furthermore, if the expectation existed before 2007 when BC's Emission Offsets Regulation came into effect, then the project would also not qualify for PCT's financial support.</p>
<p>Offsetters and the First Nations in the GBR say, however, that it is more important to focus on the "government-to-government" negotiations that have been underway between the six First Nations and the province for some time.</p>
<p>"While government‐to‐government conversations began before November 29, 2007, the final agreement that enabled the project was not finalized until March 31, 2009. Extended negotiations between First Nations and the Provincial Government resulted in the changes to legislations and regulations for land use planning in the area resulting in the Forest Carbon Project. Revenue from carbon credits was considered a critical factor to the full implementation and long‐term success of this land use planning, and was a key component in the agreement."</p>
<p>Offsetters CEO James Tansey, says that the GBR carbon project is an "iconic project" that holds the promise of forming the "economic foundation for First Nations for generations." He adds that previous stories that cast "skepticism" on earlier projects supported by PCT persuaded the various proponents of the GBR carbon project to decline issuing press releases.</p>
<p>He believes, as well, that the "charismatic story" of the GBR will allow local First Nations to actively court more carbon buyers in the months and years ahead, and that 400 companies have been identified as possible purchasing candidates.</p>
<p>Yet the biggest purchaser to date is a Crown-owned entity. The offsets were generated on Crown lands. And the public apparently is not entitled to know the transaction costs.</p>
<p><em>Photo: Dogwood Initiative/Flickr</em></p>
</p></div></div></div>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 15:12:16 +0000PolicyNote98342 at http://rabble.caThe Mint Film Festical celebrates World Water Day with arts and activismhttp://rabble.ca/whatsup/mint-film-festival-celebrates-world-water-day-and-first-year-anniversary-arts-and-activism-0
<div class="field field-name-field-eventstart field-type-date field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span class="date-display-single">Thursday, March 22, 2012 - 23:00</span></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-image-for-node field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://rabble.ca/sites/default/files/styles/large_story_850px/public/default_images/rabble-filler-photo.jpg?itok=3JmBbChQ" width="1180" height="600" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-22 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/issues/politics-canada">Politics in Canada</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><p>The Mint Film Festical celebrates World Water Day with arts and activism</p>
<p>Tony Clarke, co-author of <em>Blue Gold: The Battle Against the Corporate Theft of the World's Water,</em> and Executive Director of Polaris Institute, speaks after award-winning film <em>Spoil</em> about the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline. </p>
<p>This documentary features breathtaking images of both the wildlife and the landscape of the Great Bear Rainforest and the challenges ahead if the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline is approved. </p>
<p>The evening includes comedy, musical guests, artists and more for World Water Day. </p>
<p>Comedian Derek Forgie kicks off with a lively set on the perils of bottled water, followed by musical performances by Canadian vocal legend Jackie Richardson, Sterling Jarvis, pianist Steve Hunter, Dylan Bell, Suba Sankaran and Glen Alan. Internationally acclaimed juggler Ted Joblin, performance artist Peter Jarvis and iconic painter Steve Houston add their own unique touches. </p>
<p>Film screenings include a series of film shorts on water and the environment including the World Theatrical Premiere of the short film <em>Dead Wrong - Stories of Fish, Clean Water &amp; Poison</em>. The short film about Wangari Maathai presented as part of the GreenHeroes Campaign will follow, along with <em>The Moraine Can't Wait: Save the Oak Ridges Moraine</em>. </p>
<p>Award presentation to Liz Marshall (director of Water on the Table).</p>
<p> </p>
</p></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-event-location field-type-location field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><div class="location vcard" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/PostalAddress">
<div class="adr">
<span class="fn" itemprop="name">Royal Ontario Museum</span>
<div class="street-address">
<span itemprop="streetAddress">100 Quen&#039;s Park, Toronto</span>
</div>
<span class="postal-code" itemprop="postalCode">M5S 2C6</span>
<span class="locality" itemprop="addressLocality">
Toronto </span>
, <span class="region" itemprop="addressRegion">ON</span>
<div class="country-name" itemprop="addressCountry">Canada</div>
<span class="geo"><abbr class="latitude" title="43.667572">43° 40' 3.2592" N</abbr>, <abbr
class="longitude" title="-79.394414">79° 23' 39.8904" W</abbr></span>
</div>
<div class="map-link">
<div class="location map-link">See map: <a href="http://maps.google.ca?q=100+Quen%27s+Park%2C+Toronto%2C+Toronto%2C+ON%2C+M5S+2C6%2C+ca">Google Maps</a></div> </div>
</div>
<div class="location-hidden">
Ontario CA </div>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-9 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/category/tags-issues/film-screening">film screening</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/category/tags-issues/world-water-day">World Water Day</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/category/tags-issues/great-bear-rainforest">Great Bear Rainforest</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/taxonomy/term/8911">Enbridge pipeline</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-23 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/category/regions/ca/on">ON</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-event-contact-name field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Glen Alan</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-event-organization field-type-link-field field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="http://www.mintff.org" target="_blank">MINT Made IN Toronto Film Festival</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-event-email field-type-email field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="mailto:info@mintff.org">info@mintff.org</a></div></div></div>Thu, 08 Mar 2012 04:58:23 +0000SarahM12390983 at http://rabble.caSix years later, it's time to end unsustainable logging in the Great Bear Rainforest http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/tmdonaldson/2012/02/six-years-later-it%E2%80%99s-time-end-unsustainable-logging-great-bear-ra
<div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Jens Wieting</div><div class="field-item odd">Valerie Langer and Eduardo Sousa</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-image-for-node field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://rabble.ca/sites/default/files/styles/large_story_850px/public/node-images/gbr_taller_header_bear.1.png?itok=XcjjadNf" width="1180" height="600" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><p>The Great Bear Rainforest is one of the last of its kind in the world. That's why so many British Columbians, and others around the globe, have stood up with the region's First Nations to safeguard it.</p>
<p>Together, our voices helped convince decision-makers to commit to saving the Great Bear Rainforest in 2006. But today, on the sixth anniversary of that promise, half of this rare, old-growth forest is still being logged. No matter which way you cut it, protecting 50 per cent of a forest won't save the whole.</p>
<p>That's the message we're asking British Columbians to send to the provincial government. We need decision makers to Take It Taller for the Great Bear Rainforest. Today, ForestEthics, Greenpeace and Sierra Club B.C. sent an open letter to Premier Christy Clark, calling on her to protect something of value to all British Columbians by making sure the Great Bear Rainforest Agreements are finally implemented.</p>
<p>The science is clear -- as long as only half of the Great Bear Rainforest is protected, the entire forest is still at risk. At least 70 per cent of the natural level of old-growth forest needs to be off-limits to logging if we want to protect one of the planet's last intact temperate coastal rainforests from disappearing forever.</p>
<p>At a time when the Great Bear Rainforest is under increasing threat from pipelines, tankers and grizzly bear trophy hunting, the provincial government has a clear opportunity to do something right now to make good on its promise to save this global gem from unsustainable logging.</p>
<p>Living up to the commitments of the Great Bear Rainforest Agreements means committing to protect more of the old-growth rainforest and the species that live in it -- including the majestic white spirit bear. It also means speeding up efforts to improve the well-being of First Nations communities in the region.</p>
<p>It's time for British Columbians to take action again and call on the provincial government to finish the job of saving the Great Bear Rainforest.</p>
<p>We're so close to finishing the job. All we have to do now is Take It Taller.</p>
</p></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-embedded-video field-type-video-embed-field field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">
<div class="embedded-video">
<div class="player">
<iframe class="" id="vimeo-36358003" width="640" height="360" src="//player.vimeo.com/video/36358003?width=640&amp;height=360&amp;color=00adef&amp;portrait=1&amp;title=1&amp;byline=1&amp;autoplay=0&amp;loop=0&amp;player_id=vimeo-36358003" frameborder="0" webkitAllowFullScreen mozallowfullscreen allowfullscreen></iframe> </div>
</div>
</div></div></div>Fri, 24 Feb 2012 23:46:22 +0000tmdonaldson90639 at http://rabble.caVictory on tanker ban motion a victory for the B.C. coast http://rabble.ca/news/2010/12/victory-tanker-ban-motion-victory-bc-coast
<div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Living Oceans Society</div><div class="field-item odd">Forest Ethics</div><div class="field-item even">Dogwood Initiative</div><div class="field-item odd">West Coast Environmental Law Association</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-image-for-node field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/news/2010/12/victory-tanker-ban-motion-victory-bc-coast"><img src="http://rabble.ca/sites/default/files/styles/large_story_850px/public/default_images/rabble-filler-photo.jpg?itok=3JmBbChQ" width="1180" height="600" alt="" /></a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p></p><p>VANCOUVER, B.C. - Environmental groups are praising the vote today in the House of Commons in support of a legislated tanker ban for Canada's Pacific North Coast. The motion was put forward by Skeena-Bulkley Valley MP Nathan Cullen whose riding includes the Great Bear Rainforest and thousands of coastal jobs that depend on a healthy marine environment.</p>
<p>"After years spent working to protect the coast and support sustainable livelihoods, the people of British Columbia do not want the imminent risk of an oil spill to destroy it all," said Nikki Skuce of ForestEthics. "Polls show that 80 per cent of British Columbians support a tanker ban -- this vote showed that most of our politicians are listening."</p>
<p>Last week, a delegation of representatives from First Nations, the fishing and tourism industries, environmental organizations, and Exxon Valdez oil spill expert Dr. Riki Ott went to Parliament Hill to urge MPs to support a legislated oil tanker ban on the North Coast. The majority of Canada's MPs appear to have heard the appeals to protect the livelihoods, cultures and environment of Canada's Pacific North Coast -- the result of the [non-binding] vote was 143/137. The Liberal Party, the NDP and the Bloc Québécois voted for the motion, while the Conservatives voted against.</p>
<p>"There are vibrant fishing, tourism and First Nations economies and cultures that would be threatened by oil tanker traffic and the risk of oil spills," said Jennifer Lash of Living Oceans Society. "The only way to stop an oil spill from causing irreparable harm to our coast is by keeping oil tankers off of it for good."</p>
<p>Support for a legislated tanker ban for Canada's Pacific North Coast is high in British Columbia and crosses party lines. The Coastal First Nations declared a tanker ban using their own laws earlier this year. The Union of B.C. Municipalities passed a resolution in support of a tanker ban in September.</p>
<p>"Today's motion creates clarity for British Columbians," said Eric Swanson of Dogwood Initiative. "There are only two types of politicians in Canada: those who support a ban on all oil tankers through our north coast, and those who don't."</p>
<p>The most imminent threat to the coast is Enbridge's Northern Gateway Pipeline proposal, which would carry tar sands oil to a supertanker port at Kitimat and bring 225 oil tankers per year to B.C.'s North Coast. Enbridge-funded pressure group known as the Northern Gateway Alliance put out ads today urging MPs not to vote for the tanker ban.</p>
<p>"A legislated tanker ban is about protecting jobs, protecting our diverse marine and coastal environments, and recognizes First Nations Rights and Title," said Josh Paterson of West Coast Environmental Law Association. "We have a world-class coast that needs strong, legal protection from the threat of oil spills - whether from Enbridge or any other project. We're going to keep working toward a legislated ban."</p>
<p>Environmental groups, including Dogwood Initiative, Forest Ethics, Living Oceans Society, and West Coast Environmental Law Association have been calling for a permanent, legislated ban on crude oil tankers to protect the coast from oil spills. B.C. MPs from the Liberal Party and NDP set aside their differences and wrote a joint letter to the Prime Minister last week to ask the government to pass a tanker ban.</p>
<p> </p></div></div></div>Wed, 08 Dec 2010 00:12:11 +0000Cathryn Atkinson80309 at http://rabble.caOil and water cannot be allowed to mix along B.C.'s stunning coastline http://rabble.ca/news/2010/10/oil-and-water-cannot-be-allowed-mix-along-bcs-stunning-coastline
<div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Tyler McCreary</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-image-for-node field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/news/2010/10/oil-and-water-cannot-be-allowed-mix-along-bcs-stunning-coastline"><img src="http://rabble.ca/sites/default/files/styles/large_story_850px/public/node-images/Oct.%2029.%20anti%20tanker%20protest.%20forestethicphotos.jpg?itok=tNqwBhI-" width="1180" height="600" alt="Vote No Tankers: A protest in Vancouver against oil tankers on B.C.&#039;s northern coast earlier this month, hosted by Forest Ethics and the Dogwood Initiative. Photo: forestethics.org" title="Vote No Tankers: A protest in Vancouver against oil tankers on B.C.&#039;s northern coast earlier this month, hosted by Forest Ethics and the Dogwood Initiative. Photo: forestethics.org" /></a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p></p><p>Beneath Alaska, between the islands of Haida Gwaii and the northern British Columbia coast, is the wide but shallow Hecate Strait. Originally termed Seegaay by the Haida, Captain George Henry Richards, affixed the name Hecate to the strait in the early 1860s. Hecate was a Greek goddess associated with magic and crossroads, a governess of the wilderness and liminal regions where the spirits interact with the living.</p>
<p>The title has proved an appropriate one for the region. The north coast is unique, famous for its Kermode or spirit bears, a rare and regionally isolated white variant of the black bear that haunts the local forests. Even the woods themselves are rare, as temperate rainforests such as the Great Bear Rainforest cover less than one per cent of the earth's surface.</p>
<p>Between the ocean and the mountains, these rainforests are cool, shadowed realms. Beneath a canopy of red cedars, Douglas fir and Sitka spruce, lies a thick carpet of ferns, salal bushes, and devil's club. Local First Nations recognized the medicinal value and spiritual potency of the forest, and used plants such as devil's club to address a range of ailments.</p>
<p>The north cast seems a world away from the anesthetized pavement and cold economics of Calgary office towers, but these seeming disparate geographies are connected through the designs of a global economy. Calgary-based energy pipeline giant Enbridge has proposed routing the Northern Gateway pipeline to a marine terminal in Kitimat, B.C. Through the twin pipeline, an eastbound line would daily transmit 193,000 barrels of condensate, a petroleum byproduct used to thin crude oil for transport, while a westbound line would transport 525,000 barrels of oil daily from the Alberta tar sands. This oil would be loaded onto approximately 225 oil tankers yearly for export to overseas markets.</p>
<p><strong>Oil and water</strong></p>
<p>Recent events, such as the BP spill in the Gulf of Mexico, highlight the substantial risks of oil in marine ecosystems. And from Kitimat, it is only a short distance up the coast to Alaska, where the memory and the effects of the Exxon Valdez spill still linger after more than two decades. That 1989 disaster dumped 49.5 million litres of crude oil into Prince William Sound, killing an estimated 250,000 seabirds, 22 orcas, and untold numbers of fish and other marine organisms. Recent studies of the continuing impact of the Exxon Valdez disaster have highlighted how lingering oil deposits affect species over decades, compromising health, growth and reproduction through sub-lethal doses, and continuing to impair species through cascading negative effects.</p>
<p>Enbridge is promising state-of-the-art shipping protocols, including double-hulled vessels, radar-monitoring stations, pilot super-tugs, and first-response emergency stations located in Kitimat and communities like Hartley Bay. They suggest that the years of political and technological change have radically altered oil transport making accidents a thing of the past. However, the recent spill of three million litres from an Enbridge pipeline into the Kalamazoo River in Michigan is a powerful reminder that humans err and safety technologies fail. While there have been significant technological advances since the late 1980s, the challenges involved with a proposed port in Kitimat are also significantly higher.</p>
<p>At the time of the Exxon Valdez disaster, U.S. coast guard admiral Paul Yost said the 16-kilometre-wide accident site in Prince William Sound "was not a treacherous area." Few familiar with the Douglas Channel, Caamano Sound, or Hecate Strait would make such an assertion. Even experienced sailors are wary of those waters, which are susceptible to violent storms and sinister weather, particularly in the winter.</p>
<p>From Kitimat, the tankers would negotiate a hazardous 98- to 158-nautical-mile exit to open water (depending on the route). They would round Hawkesbury Island, Gribbell Island, Princess Royal Island, and Gil Island, where BC Ferries' Queen of the North sank in 2006. Then the tankers would either negotiate a hard turn out the Caamano Sound or navigate the Principe Channel to the Hecate Strait. Environment Canada has identified the Hecate Strait as the world's fourth most dangerous waterway. If oil tankers are allowed in these unpredictable northern waters, it will be a matter of when, not if, there will be an oil spill.</p>
<p>If the Hecate Strait and Douglas Channel can be malevolent, they are also vulnerable. The area is regularly visited by vital migrating populations of humpback, gray, and minke whales, as well as porpoises, orcas, and dolphins. Across the channel from the proposed tanker terminal are the Coste Rocks, one of many sites seals frequent along the tanker route. Beneath the surface is an oceanic underworld of mollusk and crustacean, plankton and seaweed, and, of course, salmon. A potential spill is an extreme risk to all these species.</p>
<p>A spill threatens not only the marine environment but also the fragile coastline. Salmon link the marine coast to the rivers and streams of the temperate rainforest through the pulse of their seasonal migrations. Runs of Coho, Chinook, Sockeye, Pink, Chum and Steelhead swimming upstream to spawn, bring life to the rainforest landscape. Many of the 140 wildlife species living in temperate rainforest, including wolves, bears, and eagles, rely on salmon as a source of food and the loss of vital salmon stocks and other marine foods would be devastating.</p>
<p>Northern residents would do little better. A spill would jeopardize the coastal seafood and recreation economy. Valued at $2.6 billion yearly by a provincial government Ocean Coordinating Committee report in April, 2007, the coastal economy provides over 45,000 jobs province-wide. Traditional sustenance economies in many communities also rely heavily on coastal resources.</p>
<p>However, economic measures fail to fully appreciate the cultural importance of connections to local environments. The livelihoods of coastal First Nations are intimately connected to the cycles of these fish, as they have been for centuries. The potential loss of the salmon represents more than lost economic opportunities -- although for many impoverished communities the impacts of such losses would be dire -- it represents the loss of a cultural connection to place.</p>
<p>These losses extend beyond the economic into the social realm. Post-traumatic stress in the wake of environmental disaster can cascade into elevated rates of unemployment, depression, alcoholism and drug abuse, divorce and suicide. Future generations are left disconnected from traditional family practices extending back countless generations.</p>
<p><strong>Shifting currents</strong></p>
<p>There is growing pressure to defend the north coast. In May, 2010, the Haisla and Gitga'at First Nations hosted a gathering in Kitimat, and almost 1,000 people came together in opposition to Enbridge's pipeline and its associated tanker traffic. The first public hearings of the federal panel reviewing the Northern Gateway project, were met by protests in Kitimat and Prince George.</p>
<p>However, the strange concoctions of global economics may be beyond the potency of local remedies. Pressuring political decision-makers and economic investors, people have held carried the message to defend the coast to protests in Vancouver and Toronto. First Nations leaders and local assemblies of concerned citizens, union organizations and municipalities, environmentalists and commercial fishermen have all called upon the federal government to institute an oil tanker ban to protect coastal ecosystems, economies, and cultures from the risk of an oil spill.</p>
<p>In March, 2010, the nine north and central Coastal First Nations declared, in accordance with their own laws, "oil tankers carrying crude oil from the Alberta tar sands will not be allowed to transit our lands and waters." A Mustel poll in May found public opinion in British Columbia concurred with the stance of coastal First Nations, as 80 per cent of British Columbians supported banning tankers from the North Coast. Most recently, at the beginning of October, the Union of B.C. Municipalities passed a resolution in support of a federally legislated oil tanker ban.</p>
<p>Politicians belonging to the reigning Conservative government are under increasing pressure to support an oil tanker ban, particularly in British Columbia. In an action facilitated by ForestEthics, North Vancouver citizens recently gave their Conservative MP, Andrew Saxton, a pipeline constructed from hundreds of postcards signed by constituents concerned about oil tanker traffic. As the Conservatives remain open to introducing tanker traffic to the north coast, the Dogwood Initiative and ForestEthics have begun a campaign calling for B.C. voters to "vote for the coast." Urging a common front in defense of this vital ecosystem, voters are being encouraged to remember their ABCs (Anyone But Conservatives) when the next election arises.</p>
<p>In response to this pressure from potentially-impacted communities the federal Liberals and NDP have pledged support for a ban on oil tanker traffic along the North Coast. Finn Donnelly, NDP MP for New Westminster-Coquitlam, has submitted a private members bill to ban tanker traffic. In June 2010, Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff announced his party supports a ban on oil tankers in north coast waters. The Conservatives remain the only federal party that does not support an oil tanker ban.</p>
<p>Instead, the Conservatives remain wed to an antiquated vision of Canada's future centred upon oil export. Considering the possibility of hundreds of supertankers loaded with as 300-million litres of crude oil navigating treacherous northern waters, Harper has proved unable to gage that the risk is simply too great. However, the hope blossoms that the growing discord over this dangerous proposal will lead the government to rethink its stance, or at least unseat the Conservatives for politicians willing to heed the voice of their constituents. <br /><br /><em>Tyler McCreary is a third-generation B.C. resident, born and raised in the Northwest. A PhD student in geography at York University, Tyler is currently conducting research on cross-cultural coalitions around environmental and development issues in the northwest of British Columbia.<br /></em></p></div></div></div>Fri, 29 Oct 2010 06:46:33 +0000Cathryn Atkinson79306 at http://rabble.caShould hate speech be banned? Campaign to stop Enbridge Northern pipeline, tankers from destroying B.C.'s Great Bear Rainforesthttp://rabble.ca/podcasts/shows/alert-canadian-dimension/2010/04/should-hate-speech-be-banned-campaign-stop-enbridge-
<div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/category/bios/geoff-hughes">Geoff Hughes</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/category/bios/chris-albi">Chris Albi</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/category/bios/mitch-podolak">Mitch Podolak</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-10 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/podcasts/shows/alert-radio-canadian-dimension">Alert! Radio from Canadian Dimension</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-image-for-node field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://rabble.ca/sites/default/files/styles/large_story_850px/public/default_images/rabble-filler-photo.jpg?itok=3JmBbChQ" width="1180" height="600" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-story-publish-date field-type-date field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span class="date-display-single">April 2, 2010</span></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><p><strong>Alert! Radio #150 - </strong></p>
<p>Professor <em>Arthur Schafer</em>, director of the Centre for Professional and Applied Ethics at the University of Manitoba, discusses issues of free speech and hate speech that arise from the cancellation of Ann Coulter’s talk at the University of Ottawa.</p>
<p><em>Art Sterrit</em>, executive director of the Coastal First Nations describes the inevitable damages expected from the proposed Enbridge Norther pipeline and its supertankers that would penetrate into the heart of BC’s Great Bear Rainforest. Art outlines the campaign mounted by a coalition of 150 native bands, several environmental organizations and dozens of prominent individuals including Margaret Atwood, David Suzuki, Thomas Berger, Bruce Cockburn and ten Olympic athletes. Some are saying that the Enbridge dispute may be the defining battle for a new generation concerned about climate change and global dependence on oil.</p>
<p>Mitch Podolak’s Music Is The Weapon this week is all about money!</p>
</p></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-9 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/taxonomy/term/17293">music</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/taxonomy/term/9930">First Nations</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/taxonomy/term/16986">money</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/category/tags-issues/ethics">ethics</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/category/tags-issues/great-bear-rainforest">Great Bear Rainforest</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-mp3 field-type-file field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">
<div class="jp-audio">
<div class="jp-type-single">
<div id="jplayer-node-74375-field-mp3-1568533428" class="jp-jplayer"></div>
<div id="jplayer-node-74375-field-mp3-1568533428_interface" class="jp-interface">
<ul class="jp-controls">
<li><a href="#" class="jp-play" tabindex="1">play</a></li>
<li><a href="#" class="jp-pause" tabindex="1">pause</a></li>
<li><a href="#" class="jp-stop" tabindex="1">stop</a></li>
<li><a href="#" class="jp-mute" tabindex="1">mute</a></li>
<li><a href="#" class="jp-unmute" tabindex="1">unmute</a></li>
</ul>
<div class="jp-progress">
<div class="jp-seek-bar">
<div class="jp-play-bar"></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="jp-volume-bar">
<div class="jp-volume-bar-value"></div>
</div>
<div class="jp-current-time"></div>
<div class="jp-duration"></div>
</div>
<div id="jplayer-node-74375-field-mp3-1568533428_playlist" class="jp-playlist">
<ul><li class="first jp-playlist-first last jp-playlist-last" oncontextmenu=""><a href="http://rabble.ca/sites/default/files/audio/ale-2010-04-01.mp3" id="jplayer-node-74375-field-mp3-1568533428_item_0" tabindex="1" onclick="">ale-2010-04-01.mp3</a></li>
</ul> </div>
</div>
</div>
</div></div></div>Mon, 05 Apr 2010 14:50:28 +0000tommyallen78974375 at http://rabble.ca